THE EMERGENCE OF NARCISSISM 135 THE EMERGENCE OF NARCISSISM IN AMERICAN 4 CULTURE: THE LAMENTATIONS OF CHRISTOPHER LASCH description of nineteenth century bourgeois patriarchy. And IN THE CULTURE OF NARCISSISM some feminists expressed concern that Lasch possessed a masculine viewpoint, avoided the oppression women had Sonya Leigh Scott experienced in the patriarchal family structure, and supported a 5 return to the domination of men over women. Introduction This paper will describe Christopher Lasch’s assertions Lamenting the loss of resolve and the diminishing confidence regarding the loss of family authority, the rise of therapeutic found in contemporary American life in the aftermath of the controls in relation to the family, and the role of feminism and its 1960’s, Christopher Lasch unleashed strong criticism of connection to the decline of the family as well as the debates American culture and the self‐preoccupation, loss of surrounding Lasch’s role as a social critic. Discussion of Lasch’s individualism, and the growing therapeutic climate he observed. viewpoints will also include critique and debates found among Lasch, along with other critics, such as Tom Wolfe and Jim historians that will demonstrate the insight and validity of Hougan, identified this self‐serving tendency that was rapidly Lasch’s notions and that will also expose some of the problems permeating society as “’collective narcissism.’”1 In The Culture of found with clarity and interpretation that created much Narcissism Lasch persuasively pointed to loss of family authority controversy. Despite the differences in interpretation that left The and traditional skills, reliance on others to guide and manage Culture of Narcissism wide open for criticism, Lasch successfully family life, and the changing roles of women as contributors to illustrated what he observed as a declining society and the many and outcomes of the “malaise” that gripped Americans.2 ways that this decline was evident. Lasch’s warning to and The debate over Lasch’s assertions has persisted, especially chastising of the American public is clear and as will be shown, among liberals, over the decades since the publishing of his book his criticisms and concerns were valid and relevant in 1979 and has remained alive well beyond his death in early notwithstanding the variety of interpretations; his main premise 1994. Intellectuals, social critics, and historians have commended of a society deteriorating into destructive narcissism. and condemned his role as a social critic, criticized his notions, and applauded his efforts to explain the problems of a declining Narcissism Defined American culture. Many felt he took a bold stance and praised Lasch explained that Americans had become “pessimistic” his refusal to succumb to the indignant left with their wounded and had lost confidence as a result of the loss of the Vietnam pride and insulted self‐righteousness.3 Others accused him of War, the slowed economic situation, and fear of depletion of nostalgia for an imagined “heroic strength of character” in his natural resources as well as being generally fatigued after the tribulation of the sixties and that this pessimism brought forth a loss of resilience and creativity to confront problems of 6 contemporary life. Lasch defined “narcissism” as the Sonya Leigh Scott, of Champaign, Illinois, is a post‐Baccalaureate student in History. “psychological dimension” of reliance on experts resulting from She wrote this paper for Dr. Jon Coit’s History 4970, The History of American Ideas, in the Fall of 2006. 1Christopher Lasch, The Culture of Narcissism: American Life in An Age of 4 Fred Siegel, “The Agony of Christopher Lasch” in Reviews in American Diminishing Expectations (New York: W.W. Norton, 1979; Norton, 1991), 6. History, 8 no.3 (Sept. 1980): 285. 2Ibid., 10. 5Michele Barrett & Mary McIntosh, “Narcissism and the Family: a Critique 3Robert Erwin, “The Critic of Progress,” Massachusetts Review 45, no. 2 of Lasch,” The New Left Review no.135 (Sept.‐Oct. 1982): 43. (Summer 2004): 291. 6 Lasch, Narcissism, xiii.
136 Historia THE EMERGENCE OF NARCISSISM 137 the loss of “productive” and “reproductive functions” of the addressed it.13 In The Culture of Narcissism Lasch offered detail family.7 By “productive functions,” Lasch was referring to skills regarding clinical narcissism found in contemporary clinical required to meet material needs and “reproductive functions” to literature and studies, and imparted a description of Freud’s having and raising children.8 Confidence in leadership had work and research into human personality and behavior. waned and with the lack of solutions to the nation’s problems, However, for the purposes of this paper, the discussion will the American public had lost the resolve to overcome this center on the disintegration of family life, the therapeutic pessimistic outlook.9 climate, and the changing relationships and roles between and of Narcissism presented as a way to overcome the “repressive men and women, as well as Lasch’s role as an historian cum conditions of the past,” to forget the past, and as a means to find social critic. some level of happiness in a hopeless world, according to Lasch.10 Americans resorted to self‐centered preoccupations with Family Authority and Its Demise an emphasis on “psychic self‐awareness,” recoiled from political Lasch explained that having and caring for children was involvement and concern for social issues, immersed themselves historically a function of the family who provided the training in material consumption, and divorced themselves from the needed to live independently in the world and that this function sense of belonging to the past and the future instead, “living for had slowly eroded in contemporary America. This training the moment.”11 Lasch provided radicalism as a more extreme included basic and essential skills; work, domestic duties, example of narcissism that, for some, was a means to fill manners and morals, and sex education.14 Children’s lives were emptiness, provide a sense of importance, and to feel significant conducted in close proximity to adults where valuable guidance by being associated with others deemed of some magnitude. and modeling of work behaviors and social skills would aid in Despite the outward appearance of social concern and political their maturing into productive citizens. Strong parent‐child interest, Lasch contended that radicals, too, were mired in self‐ relationships helped to provide a firm foundation from which centeredness and the need for validation by their group children would grow and develop.15 leaders.12 Lasch described the longings of Susan Stern, of the The problem of family authority developed, according to radical group the Weathermen as an example of narcissism in Lasch, with the advent of industrialization and its subsequent radical attire. “invasion” of family life.16 The factory system took work out of Early in his book, Lasch elaborated on narcissism from a the sight of children, thus separating them from the adult world clinical perspective and used descriptions found typically in the and the instruction they had previously received from parents. arenas of psychology and sociology to describe this The “deterioration of child care” (or “transfer of functions” as phenomenon. He suggested that in order to fully comprehend Lasch chided using a sociological term that he considered narcissism as a “social and cultural phenomenon” it was “jargon”) occurred as the primary care of children left the home necessary to look at the expanding corpus of writing that and was taken over by assorted institutions.17
7Ibid., 10. 8Ibid. 13Ibid., 35. 9Ibid., xiii. 14Ibid., 154. 10Ibid., xv. 15Ibid., 169. 11Ibid., 12, 5. 16Ibid. 12Ibid., 7. 17Ibid., 169.
138 Historia THE EMERGENCE OF NARCISSISM 139
As the rearing of children left the home, other agencies, such Deprived of the fathers influence and smothered by insecure as schools, assumed roles previously held by parents and other yet increasingly distant mothers, children were unable to family members and with the loss of traditional parental roles, develop psychologically and, Lasch says, what occurred was parents found themselves uneasy about their ability to skillfully “the development of a harsh and punitive superego based raise their own children.18 Out of this came the “helping largely on archaic images of the parents, fused with grandiose professions”; experts who advertised themselves as essential to self‐images.”24 This set up children to enter adulthood in an the well‐being of the family and inferring that families were already ailing society with, as Lasch credited Henry and Yela incapable of taking care of themselves.19 Lowenfeld for describing, “’restlessness, discontent, depressive Convinced by these experts that they had fallen short of the moods, craving for substitute satisfaction.’”25 “ideal of perfect parenthood,” parents grew increasingly Thus, the family of the nineteenth century, with its dependent on the expanding social service industry.20 Lasch saw independence, individualism, and strength of character, slowly this as a catalyst in the deteriorating parent‐child connection disintegrated as the socialization of children left the authority of already being experienced in families from industrialization the home and was scattered amongst experts and agencies that coupled with the narcissistic tendencies that were emerging. assumed control of all aspects of the children’s lives. That which Gone was the confident mother who possessed skills passed remained under the auspices of the mother was coerced by down through the generations, who understood her children experts, science and technology, leaving the floundering and and had strong emotional bonds with them, and who displayed confused mother doting on her children, while at the same time fearless belief in her own judgment.21 She now wallowed preoccupied with her own performance and how it appeared to anxiously in ever‐changing advice from child development others.26 specialists and pediatricians and teachers giving up her own authority and passing it off to others. The Rise of the Therapeutic Climate Aiding in the deterioration of family authority, fathers As the authority of the family wasted away, Lasch observed became enmeshed in the corporate world, striving for wealth and described the emerging power of a new industry that and comfort, selling themselves to achieve material success, and supplanted the lost functions previously contained inside of assuming an image of social and corporate savvy.22 They, too, nineteenth century family structure; the social service industry. relied on the experts and designers of programs to find success Parents now either willingly relegated or were forced to give up becoming more dependent on agencies outside the family for a their roles as primary caregivers and decision makers for their sense of competence and importance thereby relinquishing their children. Schools, child advocacy organizations, the juvenile authority in the family and the family’s loss of individualism, court system, and agencies providing parent education became influence, and indeed, accountability.23 the regulators of all aspects of child welfare with parents becoming subordinates.27
18Ibid., 154‐155. 19Ibid., 155. 20Ibid., 169‐170. 24Ibid., 178. 21Ibid., 170. 25Ibid., 179. 22Ibid., 58‐59. 26Ibid., 154. 23Ibid., 167. 27Ibid., 156.
140 Historia THE EMERGENCE OF NARCISSISM 141
Especially vulnerable to social service agencies were of being in trouble.34 Lasch believed that this system in particular working class and immigrant families as it was assumed by was a good example of how “altruism,” or the state as therapist, many of these agencies that the family structure was quite had usurped family functions.35 limited in its ability to promote “sociability and cooperation” The power of social services meant to preserve the family and that outside interference was essential in order to preserve ultimately served to diminish its authority, in Lasch’s view, and the integrity of the family.28 Lasch asserted that there was the by this helped to reinforce the growing narcissism seen in assumption among experts that poor immigrant families American life. In its wake was left weakness, insecurity, and “exploited” their children, if given the opportunity, to escape anxiety among parents that promoted reliance and dependence poverty by sending them to work to help provide for the upon others for basic family functions and was where family.29 In the guise of advocacy, child welfare agencies used individualism and the parent‐child relationship suffered its their systems to “Americanize” or “civilize” these families and demise. impose their agendas upon these unwitting newcomers.30 Child labor laws were proposed to protect these children but in Feminism and Its Impact addition to this advocates called for the schools to assume Lasch found in his observations that not only had the parent‐ custody of these alleged at‐risk children.31 child relationship suffered in contemporary American life but Lasch charged many of these obtrusive systems with that the relationship between men and women had begun to actually creating the needs they supposed to relieve by playing “crumble” as women began to assert independence from their on fears, creating “jargon,” and mocking self‐help.32 Already ripe domestic roles and as they had begun to detach from maternal for accepting these notions, parents, especially mothers, sought inclinations.36 Changes in the functions of the family indeed had out the experts for either their own narcissistic compulsions or in lead to the “marriage contract having lost its binding an attempt to blend in with the pervasive American trend character.”37 Managerial style controls imposed by bureaucracy toward submission to the latest fad in child rearing.33 coupled with the removal of the familial model freed women So strong was the prevailing belief by many in social service from “many of its former constraints” and created tensions in agencies that parents would somehow inadvertently hurt their the form of troublesome reactions and responses by men.38 children, child advocates pushed for addressing children’s Women were no longer content to live under the protective mental health concerns to the schools as this was a more subordination of men with both its benefits and outrages and accessible arena to reach children as opposed to their homes. The “rejected their confining position on the pedestal of masculine juvenile court system was another example Lasch offered that adoration, and demanded the demystification of female was also used as a means to replicate what was believed parents sexuality.”39 Lasch suggested that with this change, men, no should be providing for children who were in trouble or at risk longer in a position of dominance and chivalry, responded with
28Ibid. 34Ibid., 156. 29Ibid., 155. 35Ibid. 30Ibid., 160. 36Ibid., 188. 31Ibid., 155. 37Ibid. 32Ibid., 228. 38Ibid., 189. 33Ibid., 161. 39Ibid., 190.
142 Historia THE EMERGENCE OF NARCISSISM 143 increased violence and aggression towards women in both to catch up with feminist viewpoints, women worked to create a “fantasies and occasionally in acts of raw violence.”40 world without men thereby further separating them from men.46 As women’s demands for satisfaction in relationships both In turn, this produced a whole new set of experts whose goal it emotionally and sexually grew, men’s responses varied from was to generate dependence rather than inspire the feeling emasculated and threatened, to that of possessing the independence of women. This helped to set up a “protective expectation of sexual favors from liberated women as if that was enclave” similar to what women had experienced before in the what liberation meant.41 Women, on the other hand, with their patriarchal family structure that they so despised.47 increasing demands for equality in the relationship and Lasch particularly criticized “radical lesbians” accusing responsiveness by men to emotional, intellectual, and sexual them of “withdrawing at every level from the struggle against needs, were angered if men did not respond in the desired male domination while directing a steady stream of abuse manner.42 The impact this had on the family also served to against men and against women who refuse to acknowledge undermine it as divorce became more common when their homosexual proclivities.”48 He suggested that this brand of compromise was not achieved and children were exposed to the thought served primarily to separate women from men when the aftermath of disintegrating families. dream of a cohesive relationship was difficult to achieve and Lasch, however, commend feminism as the movement in served as “only one of many strategies for controlling or which sexual stereotypes were “discredited,” that allowed escaping from strong feeling.”49 Lasch argued that this escape women to break out of submission to and domination by men, convinced women that their needs would not be met in and that also created a situation that “made it possible to heterosexual relationships or perhaps in any other way that this acknowledge sexual antagonism without raising it to the level of promoted retreat from “intense emotional encounters.”50 all‐out warfare.”43 But this had its problems as well. Lasch noted Men, therefore, were left with the belief that women were that as women began to view men from a position of equal impossible to satisfy, which fortified “early fantasies of a footing, they lost the safety that was found in their previous possessive, suffocating, devouring, and castrating mother,” and situations. Now, although feeling that men were “human reinforced dichotomous responses to women.51 In a narcissistic beings,” forgiving their shortcomings had become increasingly society, this furthered self‐preoccupation, emotional detachment, difficult.44 In the feminist view, settling for less implied dependence on experts, and propagated loss of individualism surrender and that could not be tolerated.45 and the breakdown of family life. According to Lasch, the primary concern with feminism was not so much the movement itself, but some of the problems it General Impressions of Lasch and his Work spawned. He stated that feminism created an institutionalization Not surprisingly, Lasch provoked a barrage of debate with of women’s activities that resulted in avoidance of confronting his assertions in The Culture of Narcissism, as might be expected challenge and competition with men. Instead of waiting for men with any work of this nature, with discussions that ranged from
40Ibid. 46Ibid., 199. 41Ibid., 191‐192. 47Ibid., 199. 42Ibid., 196. 48Ibid. 43Ibid., 195. 49Ibid. 44Ibid., 196. 50Ibid., 202. 45Ibid. 51Ibid., 203.
144 Historia THE EMERGENCE OF NARCISSISM 145
Lasch’s role as a social critic, to what he asserted, to assorted American life that he was not? To be completely detached from interpretations of what he meant. The critique of Lasch’s work American culture would have required an almost monastic frequently began with his role as an historian and social critic, existence and while Lasch may have had some level of his method of imparting his criticisms, and the validity of his detachment he certainly did not lead the life of a monk. work. Criticizing Lasch in harsher terms than being somewhat In his article in American Studies, Steven Watts explained that detached, Fred Siegel, in “The Agony of Christopher Lasch,” Lasch left “academic scholarship” and entered the “realm of renounced Lasch strongly suggesting that Lasch was “cut off social criticism,” becoming a “public intellectual” rather than a from the intellectual authority from the past even as he echoes “professional historian” as most were familiar with.52 He its ideas.”56 Siegel argued that Lasch was separated from society suggested that the problems with Lasch’s approach were his and that his separation also distanced him from the past. In intellectual proclivities and the unfamiliarity many had with his Siegel’s opinion, those who are so isolated tend to crave resources that made following his line of thinking quite difficult. acceptance by others and in that way Lasch was actually Watts noted that throughout Lasch’s work he often appeared as displaying the very notions he was criticizing and questioned a “disembodied intellectual historian at work.”53 Michael Heale why Lasch’s work had received so much attention.57 agreed with Watts characterization of Lasch being somewhat When looking at Siegel’s criticisms, their strength is lost with detached, but found Lasch to be “engaged” despite this his accusations of Lasch’s isolation and the narcissistic detachment which created the insistence that “society confront tendencies that Siegel seems to believe are on display. He decries itself.”54 Lasch’s use of psychology and sociology and appears to be of the Apparently, the problem with detachment, according to mindset that this somehow diminishes Lasch’s observations. Watts and Heale, was that it made Lasch suspect in the eyes of Siegel becomes lost in his anger at how Lasch has interpreted the public as if looking down from on high. Still, Robert intellectual history but does not offer his views on the problems Westbrook noted that Lasch sought to maintain “intellectual of contemporary American culture. Rather, he chooses to independence” and that he felt it important to have a variety of disagree with Lasch at every turn and seems to miss the point of perspectives available, one of which would be a view from the what Lasch proffered thereby nullifying the entire body of work. outside.55 The question then would be, must one be immersed in Jeremy Beer, Kevin Mattson, and Steven Watts all agreed that which he or she seeks to criticize? Lasch, like most that Lasch’s work was of great value as he opened up the historians, was familiar with looking at culture from an outside awareness of how the narcissistic personality was created by perspective to whatever degree that is possible. In what ways “contemporary social conditions” and was willing to anger all should or could Lasch have been engaged with contemporary sides without allegiance to the Left or the Right.58 Robert Erwin suggested that much of the criticism directed toward Lasch was because he “antagonized” radicals and wounded their “source of 52Steven Watts, “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry Critic: Christopher esteem.”59 Lasch’s friend Jean Elshtain noted that he “courted Lasch’s Struggle with Progressive America,” American Studies, 33, no.2 (Fall 1992): 114. 53Ibid., 119. 56Fred Siegel, “The Agony of Christopher Lasch,” Reviews in American 54Michael J. Heale, “The Revolting American Elites: Christopher Lasch and History 8, no. 3 (Sept. 1980): 295. his Enemies,” Journal of American Studies 31, no. 1 (April 1997): 102. 57Ibid., 285, 295. 55Robert B. Westbrook, “Christopher Lasch, The New Radicalism, and the 58Jeremy Beer, “On Christopher Lasch,” in Modern Age 47, 4 (Fall 2005): 336. Vocation of Intellectuals,” Reviews in American History 23, no.1 (1995): 187. 59Robert Erwin, The Critic of Progress, 291.
146 Historia THE EMERGENCE OF NARCISSISM 147 controversy” which opened him up to much of the criticism confidence of the American people in their government and offered, especially from liberal factions.60 leaders.63 Caddell provided a summary of Lasch’s book and Many critics did not find Lasch’s transition from historian to suggested to the President that restoring the nation’s confidence social critic problematic rather gave merit to the broad and unity by returning to more traditional values would solve perspective it offered social criticism by incorporating an the nation’s serious economic and energy problems.64 historical perspective. And most were impressed by Lasch’s Communications adviser Gerald Rafshoon suggested a domestic willingness to swim against the current of popular liberal summit at Camp David to work on resolving the nation’s thought despite the outrage hurled against him and, as Robert problems.65 Erwin wrote, made Lasch “unforgivable” in the eyes of Christopher Lasch was one of 150 people from a variety of postmoderns.61 Jeremy Beer offered this; “His [Lasch’s] work disciplines invited to Camp David to meet with the President confirms the truth of T.J. Jackson Lears’s observation that ‘the and his staff to discuss policy issues and the crises faced by most profound radicalism is often the most profound Americans, in particular, the spiritual crisis. Following this conservatism.’”62 summit, President Carter prepared his speech on the energy Lasch’s willingness to open himself up to the fury of the Left crisis based on his discussions with those attending. Much of along with his ability to incorporate psychology, sociology, and this speech was based on what Caddell had summarized from history gives his work as a social critic distinct credibility. Lasch’s book highlighting loss of confidence, of traditional Whether or not his peers or those reading his book were familiar values such as hard work and consumer restraint, and the with his resources in no way minimizes his observations. By pessimism that had rendered Americans spiritually deficient and moving away from the Leftist enclave and his aversion to helpless.66 submitting himself to any single discipline’s authority suggested The angry Fred Siegel criticized Lasch’s inclusion in Carter’s a freedom and flexibility of thought so necessary to engage in summit and suggested that the “celebrity” Lasch gained from social criticism. Lasch also placed himself in the public eye, a this was another example of the desire of “isolated intellectuals” place he was never comfortable with, to offer insight into what to find political esteem that, in Siegel’s mind, minimized the he was observing in American culture and engage in the value of Lasch’s work.67 Jeremy Beer acknowledged that Lasch conversation and problem‐solving efforts that might help move did find “national stature as a social critic” with the call to the the country forward. White House summit, but noted that Lasch was primarily concerned with the way Carter and Caddell had interpreted The Lasch and the President Culture of Narcissism.68 Siegel’s critique seems to stem more from A pollster and adviser to President Jimmy Carter, Patrick Caddell was moved by The Culture of Narcissism, and with the encouragement of First Lady Rosalynn Carter wrote a seventy 63Daniel Horowitz, Jimmy Carter and the Energy Crisis of the 1970’s: The “Crisis five page memo to the President discussing the diminishing of Confidence” Speech of July 15, 1979. A Brief History with Documents” (Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2005), 16‐17. 64Ibid., 18‐19. 65Ibid. 60Jean Bethke Elshtain, “The Life and Work of Christopher Lasch: An 66Ibid., 24. American Story,” Salmagundi nos. 106‐107 (Spring‐Summer 1995): 146. 67Siegel, The Agony of Christopher Lasch, 294. 61Erwin, The Critic of Progress, 291. 68Jermey Beer, “On Christopher Lasch,” in Modern Age 47, no. 4 (Fall 2005): 62Beer, On Christopher Lasch, 331. 338.
148 Historia THE EMERGENCE OF NARCISSISM 149
Lasch being asked to participate along with many others rather he, on one hand, suggested a conservative return to patriarchal than how his work was viewed by Carter and appears quick to authority and on the other supported a more radical dismiss the importance of the event itself. President Carter’s inclination.73 willingness to engage in conversation with such a diverse and Feminist writers Michele Barrett and Mary McIntosh inclusive assembly that included the historian and social critic criticized the reliance of Lasch on nineteenth century families as Lasch certainly must be considered of greater significance than a guide and suggested that this model was representative of the notoriety as a consequence of participation in the summit. “mythology of the ‘real’ family.”74 They observed that Lasch’s Kevin Mattson noted that Lasch’s work “struck a chord” and discussion of this family model did not provide the time that it that the resulting fame was something that Lasch was quite existed and that class and cultural conditions had been ignored, uncomfortable with.69 He applauded Lasch for his ability to which, they asserted, created a historical vagueness. maintain his role as a social critic despite newfound fame and Barrett and McIntosh provided the most valid critique of also credited Lasch for possessing the resolve to argue with Lasch’s discussion of family authority and while offering power—as Lasch did in a letter to Patrick Caddell regarding the criticism, did not completely dismiss his notions as Siegel did. tone of Carter’s speech as well as the interpretation of the book.70 Rather, Barrett and McIntosh succinctly described the confusion Siegel’s insistence that Lasch craved the celebrity he experienced surrounding what Lasch was asserting and it is apparent how it would suggest that the White House invitation left Lasch starry‐ was possible to miss the point or misinterpret what Lasch was eyed with his inclusion in the band of notable people although attempting to represent. Siegel opted to limit his exploration to evidence of this is not apparent. As noted by Robert Erwin, complaints of nostalgia and a lack of cohesion that creates a hole Lasch shouldered criticism from liberals, conservatives, and in his argument. radicals and stayed firm in his convictions, refusing to acquiesce Steven Watts did not interpret Lasch’s reference to authority to what fame or the influences of fame might bring.71 as meaning the power to control, rather he referred to a larger definition that included “loyalty by a moral consensus of a Arguments Surrounding Family Authority community” and the “self‐restraints of character to which it The overwhelming argument against Lasch’s comments on [authority] is linked.”75 Kevin Mattson, in Polity, suggested that the demise of family authority as an indicator of the decline of Lasch’s concern was for “internalization,” not nostalgia, and that American culture was that Lasch was nostalgic for a way of life this was simply praise for the working class without the considered outdated and irrelevant in modern society. Fred assumption that it was somehow better.76 Mattson, despite his Siegel accused Lasch of a “Victorian longing” and that he opinion that the accusations of others that Lasch was nostalgic presented himself as “a guardian of tradition” suggesting that were not fair, did note that it was not clear how to understand Lasch’s arguments stood on shaky ground.72 Siegel asserted that the positive attributes of history regarding the family but still what Lasch tried to present was not cohesive, as it appeared that dismissed this as merely problematic.77
69Kevin Mattson, “The Historian as a Social Critic: Christopher Lasch and 73Ibid., 286. the Uses of History,” History Teacher 36, no.3 (May 2003), Database available 74Barrett & McIntosh, Narcissism and the Family, 39. online from Academic Search Primer no. 10011259: paragraph 24. 75Watts, Sinners in the Hands, 116‐117. 70Ibid. paragraph 25. 76Kevin Mattson, “Christopher Lasch and the Possibilities of Chastened 71Robert Erwin, The Critic of Progress, 289. Liberalism,” Polity 36, no. 3 (April 2004): 428, 442. 72Siegel, The Agony of Christopher Lasch, 285‐286. 77Kevin Mattson, “The Historian As a Social Critic,” paragraph 35.
150 Historia THE EMERGENCE OF NARCISSISM 151
Steven Watts elaborated on the nature of the criticism present this decline. Had he provided a variety of models that lodged against Lasch when he was damned as “upholding represented a cross section of American culture, less confusion traditional values,” as “authoritarian,” and as romanticizing the and disagreement might have resulted. Still, Lasch’s assertion “bourgeois family, patriarchal power, and bourgeois character of that the family unit slowly collapsed under the weight of self‐control.”78 Explaining that Lasch’s viewpoint was not industrialization and corporate control and that parental understood, Watts noted that what actually came out of the influence was subsequently undermined is easily surmised as demise of the family was decreased freedom, increased are the problems that grew out of the loss of individualism, conformity and repression as individualism was lost. Watts felt especially in an ever increasing narcissistic society. Lasch did not that these attacks, primarily from the Left, were out of a sense of presuppose a return to the bourgeois family as a means to betrayal and that they simply missed the point Lasch was trying correct an ailing society but merely presented this model to note to make.79 the advance of corporate controls and the subsequent loss of Agreeing with Watts, Jean Elshtain echoed that Lasch was skills in parenting as well as healthy child development inside of often misunderstood and that he was better at asking questions the family structure that was previously brought about by the than coming up with answers. She also noted that Lasch’s lessons found in family relationships. “insistence” on self‐restraint that was characteristic of nineteenth The strength in Lasch’s observation with regard to the loss of century family and an important part of its teaching family authority clearly lies in his exploration of what facilitated demonstrated his understanding of human weakness and the its disintegration, sustained the downward spiral, and resulted need for authority.80 in significant deskilling of parents in many household functions, Barrett and McIntosh were in support of Lasch in that he in particular, childrearing. Although this comes through, some questioned why family life had become difficult and alluded to of his notions are perhaps lost with the distraction of the the implications of materialism along with the “idiocy and nineteenth century family model that detracted from the more hypocrisy of much contemporary thinking.”81 They were also in important aspects of his discussion. This distraction may have agreement with Lasch that with the “degeneration of the family resulted in some of the difficulties found with interpretation and and individual integrity” a new class was created that benefited focus on the main issues concerning the family as well as the from this.82 Lasch’s “concern for real needs” and his study of numerous interpretations that can be found among reviewers of family disintegration and its causes addressed what tended to be Lasch’s work. missing in most studies, according to Barrett and McIntosh, and for this they praised Lasch highly.83 Family and the State Clarity was ultimately the most significant problem with Lasch lost a considerable amount of his support in his Lasch’s discussion of the decline of family authority and, in assertions that social service agencies had taken over parental particular, his use of the nineteenth century family as a way to authority and had lead to the deskilling of parents. Jean Elshtain explained that Lasch’s criticism of the “helping professions” as 78Watts, Sinners in the Hands, 117. he called them revolved around the harm they inflicted because 79Ibid. of their desire to “reform.”84 Kevin Mattson suggested that what 80Elshtain, The Life and Work of Christopher Lasch, 152. Lasch was criticizing included therapeutic manipulation and a 81Ibid., 38. 82Barrett and McIntosh, Narcissism and the Family, 39. 83Ibid., 38. 84Barrett and McIntosh, Narcissism and the Family, 156.
152 Historia THE EMERGENCE OF NARCISSISM 153 desire for dominion over the natural and human world. What all. However, if viewed from the perspective of how the family Lasch had forgotten, though, was that many Modernists had has lost authority and that much of this authority has been asserted the view that there was a need to see the limitations in virtually abducted, it is possible to understand Lasch’s what therapy proposed. Mattson noted that Lasch often ignored disquietude. One of the problems that emerges is the sizable gap pragmatism and that reform could take many paths. He believed between what might be helpful and what is coercive and that Lasch, in this instance, had a “one‐sided perspective” and authoritarian, which is completely missing from Lasch’s did not consider the “potentials of modern reform.”85 discussion. Again, with a more meticulous explanation of how Barrett and McIntosh offered a significant amount of social agencies might provide some benefit and how and where criticism of Lasch’s assertions as they applied to social services their role should be, Lasch’s criticism would have been better stating that Lasch had assumed that “collective responsibility” received. The absolute control and the creation of an industry for child rearing was “necessarily invasive and totalitarian.”86 was certainly well described by Lasch and this alone was strong Agreeing with Lasch that a capitalist state and many agencies enough to garner at least some level of support of his viewpoint concerned with welfare did exert a significant amount of social and a minimum of suspicion regarding the social service control and encouraged consumerism, they accused him of industry as a whole. Lasch’s questioning of the social service setting aside the importance of the welfare state as an outcome industry was indeed valid but the discussion seemed incomplete of the “struggle of the working class and some collectivization of and thus easy to misinterpret the main points. care.”87 Social services are valuable even if flawed, as Barrett and McIntosh surmised, in order to avoid the family needing to The Problem with Feminism assume full responsibility for those needing assistance with Lasch ended up with considerable criticism regarding his women usually providing the care.88 remarks that the feminist movement presented a significant Among those critiquing Lasch, this area of his work was not problem for women and that family and relationships had been subject to the level of criticism as that of his discussion of the strongly affected. Agreeing that much of the feminist movement family. It is possible, as explained by Kevin Mattson, that had “been caught up in the dominant‐culture discourse of self‐ concern of state control and the manipulation found in some fulfillment and gratification,” Steven Watts found that the therapeutic institutions were not lost on liberals and Modernists problem in Lasch’s work was that he did not talk about where and therefore did not warrant argument.89 Barrett and McIntosh the feminine place should be.90 He believed that this presented a provided sufficient and compelling arguments alone to bring serious problem for Lasch in his critique of feminism. Lasch’s concern into question although they considered his The objections of Barrett and McIntosh revolved around questioning valid. what they saw as Lasch’s masculine viewpoint. His failure to Lasch does cause some concern in his critique of social adequately mention the oppression of women in the patriarchal service agencies as he is not clear on where they do fit in and at family and his focus on the benefits only presented a serious first glance it appears that he does not believe that they fit in at problem.91 They also took issue with the impression that Lasch left, that feminism attacked the family and that he seemed to 85Mattson, Christopher Lasch and the Possibilities, 443. 86Barrett & McIntosh, Narcissism and the Family, 42. 87Ibid., 41. 88Ibid. 90Watts, Sinners in the Hands, 119. 89Mattson, Christopher Lasch and the Possibilities, 443. 91Barrett & McIntosh, Narcissism and the Family, 43.
154 Historia THE EMERGENCE OF NARCISSISM 155 mourn the loss of the bourgeois patriarchal family despite its missed the highly emotional nature of and real problems oppression of women.92 encountered in lesbian relationships. Grouping lesbianism with Barrett and McIntosh vehemently disagreed with Lasch’s the feminist movement is also problematic and presupposed a suggestion that feminism was included with drug use and common goal that does not necessarily exist. And although the suicide as a way to avoid deep emotion. That women should increase in the failure of many marriages warranted exploration somehow learn to live with “sexual antagonism” was further of the role of feminism especially when coupled with narcissistic proof of his masculine point of view.93 Agreeing with Lasch’s tendencies, he does not include the role of men in the equation, assertions that marriage had become more fragile and “full of merely stating that men were confused and unclear about how hostility and recrimination,” they would not agree that the they should respond to the new demands of women. . feminist movement should assume responsibility, but rather Another problem with Lasch’s criticism of feminism comes underlying social conditions confronting both women and men with the omission of the progress afforded women through the in contemporary America.94 movement and that feminists’ demands for equal pay and Opposing this point of view, Kevin Mattson suggested that opportunities would benefit not only women, but also the family Lasch was not longing for a traditional past where men where as a whole. He either was not able to see, or opted not to men were dominant.95 He supported the notion that Lasch was mention that economic independence had the potential to actually of the belief that feminists could reshape the frame of liberate women and release them from subordinate roles outside the family and that the public had actually misinterpreted the family unit. It is possible, however, that Lasch concerned Lasch’s commentary on feminism as selfishness.96 Jean Elshtain himself primarily with the disintegrating family and loss of explained that Lasch felt women were lost in the battle for individualism and that this consumed him to the point of progressive versus traditional knowledge and were being neglecting to find or seek out the positive elements of the managed by the feminist movement.97 feminist movement as it was at the time but this limitation Lasch’s critique of feminism does in some ways appear to caused considerable problems in this portion of his criticism. revolve around the creation of a new form of control over the lives of families by establishing yet another way to relinquish Conclusion individualism and relegate authority to another body, in this In The Culture of Narcissism, Christopher Lasch was able to case, the feminist movement. He certainly provided compelling uncover the problems of twentieth century American life observations of the more radical elements found in some lesbian stemming from the pessimistic outlook found in the aftermath of and militant feminist enclaves where conformity is insisted. This the turbulent 1960’s and the narcissistic tendencies born of this portion of his observation is easily supported and appears to pessimism that expanded with industrialization and corporate have validity. The problem here, though, is that he limited his control of all aspects of family life. Many critics and reviewers of discussion to what he surmised as radical and escapist and Lasch and his book found his work to be “both democratic and anti‐liberal” in the words of Jeremy Beer; “an independent 92Ibid., 38. intelligence resistant to intellectual fashions,” by Michael Heale; 93Ibid., 44. a call to “toughen liberalism,” offered by Kevin Mattson, as well 94Ibid. as his suggestion that Lasch demonstrated how historians are 95Mattson, Christopher Lasch and the Possibilities, 428‐429. 96Ibid., 429. 97Elshtain, The Life and Work of Christopher Lasch, 158.
156 Historia THE EMERGENCE OF NARCISSISM 157 relevant in debate.98 Lasch effectively drew upon a scholarly areas negated the benefits that could be found in his critique and background and added to that his skill as an intellectual with the minimized his arguments. It was not with ease that one was result being a very comprehensive work that crossed disciplines able to see that what Lasch was actually criticizing was the and party lines. pressure to conform and the loss of independence and Lasch was able to explore the problems of the social services individualism found in the firm embrace of some social service industry and the feminist movement and look beyond his own agencies, schools, and feminist groups. socialist and leftist inclinations to issue strong criticism at the Christopher Lasch, regardless of the problems of risk of alienating those he was typically affiliated with. Willing interpretation, did provide a persuasive and compelling look at to place himself in a very public position that caused him great the decline of American culture following a particularly difficult discomfort, Lasch agreed to engage in discourse with others at and transforming time and how this decline was perpetuated by the invitation of President Carter and endured the brief moment self‐preoccupation, submission to outside controls, and the of fame that resulted without abandoning his role as a social deskilling of Americans by corporate controls and reliance on critic. He remained an independent observer of culture with all technology. His warnings of the dangers of a narcissistic society the praise and criticism that entailed. and the demise of culture were meant not just as criticism, but The primary problem found in The Culture of Narcissism was also as a wake‐up call. the occasional lack of clarity that gave rise to a variety of At the close of The Culture of Narcissism Christopher Lasch interpretations especially in his use of the nineteenth century states, “In a dying culture, narcissism appears to embody—in family as a marker to determine the level of deterioration the guise of personal ‘growth’ and ‘awareness’—the highest experienced by the contemporary American family. He did not attainment of spiritual enlightenment. The custodians of culture elaborate on his choice of the middle class family as a sort of hope, at bottom, merely to survive its collapse. The will to a model and it was assumed by many that he held up this model better society, however, survives. Along with traditions of as an ideal. This caused great consternation among the Left and localism, self‐help, and community action that only need the among feminists, as Lasch seemed to be favoring a return to vision of a new society, a decent society, to give them new conservative patriarchal mores of the previous century. There vigor.” 99 This statement probably best sums Lasch’s concerns were those who were able to see what Lasch was aiming at, and his motivation to engage in social criticism and where his however they too felt that Lasch might have been more explicit willingness to extend beyond his own world as an academic into in his discussion of the changes he observed in the family and the harsher world of social critic shows courage and strength as how he viewed what had been lost and what could be gained he opened himself up reluctantly in a very public way to the from looking at the family structure of earlier times. trials and tribulations of the dual roles of historian and social Likewise, Lasch provided little in the way of positive critic. attributes of social service agencies and the feminist movement and this coupled with the problem of the nineteenth century family authority model created significant misunderstanding of what Lasch proffered. The narrowness of his viewpoint in these
98Beer, On Christopher Lasch, 331; Heale, The Revolting American Elites, 102; Mattson, The Historian As a Social Critic, paragraph 39. 99Lasch, Narcissism, 234.